Published as: De Coene, K., Ongena, T., Stragier, F., Vervust, S., Bracke, W. & De Maeyer, P. (2012). Ferraris, the legend. The Cartographic Journal , vol. 49 (1), pp. 30-42. FERRARIS , THE LEGEND Karen De Coene, Thérèse Ongena 1, Frederic Stragier, Soetkin Vervust, Wouter Bracke, Philippe De Maeyer Department of Geography, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] (Department of Biology, Ecosystem Management Research Group, University of Antwerp) [email protected] [email protected] (Prints and Maps, Royal Library of Belgium) [email protected] ABSTRACT At the end of the 18th century, a large-scale map of the Austrian Netherlands and the Prince-Bishopric of Liège was manufactured, covering more or less the current territory of Belgium. The work for this Carte de Cabinet was carried out by artillerists under the guidance of count Joseph de Ferraris, who was commissioned for the task by the Habsburg government. At the time that the map was designed, no modern legend was included. This report tries to fill that gap by presenting a legend that was constructed more systematically than any of its predecessors. It is based on the structure of the legend of the Topographic Map of Belgium and the CORINE land cover map , making it an easy-to-use tool for modern researchers. The problems encountered during the development of the legend are described, and the link between the Carte de Cabinet and 18 th -century French cartography as well as with cartographic manuals is also discussed. INTRODUCTION In the last quarter of the eighteenth century, an important chapter in Belgian map making was about to be written. For the first time, a territory was going to be mapped in a detailed, systematic and complete way. Count de Ferraris was commissioned by the Habsburg government to make a large-scale map of the Austrian Netherlands and the Prince-Bishopric of Liège. As this map included almost the entire territory of Belgium today, it is perceived as the first topographic map of the country. For scientists and cartographers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, it served as a model for map making of the Belgian territory (De Maeyer, 2008). Since its creation, the Ferraris map has served as a protagonist in the history of cartography in the Belgian discourse. 1 KDC = TO There is, however, one gap in this Belgian cartographic saga: the Ferraris map, or the Carte de Cabinet des Pays-Bas autrichiens levée à l'initiative du comte de Ferraris , as it is officially known, lacks a comprehensive legend. To a modern cartographer, the absence of a legend that accompanies and explains the map might be surprising. After all, a map is a rhetorical operation and represents a graphic discourse. As such, the use of a legend is of crucial importance (Besse, 2008). However, no legend was included in the eighteenth century Carte de Cabinet , which was a map that served a military purpose. The opposite is true for the Carte Marchande , a map that Ferraris derived from the Carte de Cabinet , but which was adapted for public sale. It was a reduced version of the original Carte de Cabinet on the same scale as the Carte de France made by the Cassini family (1 : 86,400) and did include a legend. The real issue at stake related to the Carte de Cabinet is the definition of a legend. Cartographers currently understand a legend as the ‘amplification or explanation of the symbols and conventions on a map’ (ICA, 1973). It is difficult to find the word ‘legend’ on 18 th century maps. When Dupain de Montesson used this word in his cartographic manual from 1763, he stated that the marching order of the soldiers should be ‘written in legend’ to avoid confusion (Montesson, 1775, p. 184). In another handbook produced more than twenty years earlier, reference letters and figures are used to indicate fortifications, military buildings with provisions and equipment of the royal army on a map. They were relegated to a ‘legend’ on the side of the map (Buchotte, 1754). Map making in the 18 th century often (but not exclusively) served military purposes, and it is within this context that the word ‘legend’ acquired a cartographic definition for the first time. In the manuals of Lacroix and Marie from the beginning of the 19 th century, the word legend is used for cartographic semiotics. To Lacroix, the way to use a map is obvious. The symbols are easy to recognise, and if not, a legend can be placed on either side of the map (Lacroix, 1811, p. 165). In his manual, Marie repeats the same arguments: a legend prevents confusion and overcrowding. When colours are used, they can be represented in small blocks (Marie, 1825, p. 4, 12, 46, 53). With regard to the representation of colours in particular, Marie’s approach indicates that we find here for the first time the modern legend as we define it today. Although bearing a later date, the examples of Lacroix and Marie clearly indicate the difference in perception between modern day cartography and the 18 th century view. In the 18 th century, the legend was a tool that should only be used when the map was not satisfactory in showing as much information as possible in a clear way. Written or drawn information on a map was preferred to symbols. Therefore, an engineer learned a cartographic language at school that used evident, i.e., with obvious meaning for all users, and conventional, i.e., agreed upon, signs. Buchotte referred to this as ‘observations où règles de convenance et des maximes pour la pratique du Dessin et du Lavis’. After an engineer started his career, manuals remained at his disposal. A good hand and a great deal of practice were prerequisites for both map makers and map users (Buchotte, 1754; Lacroix, 1811). Mémoires , i.e., written reports that accompanied the map, rendered final information. Thus, a survey of all symbols used was not deemed necessary. The semiotics used on Ferraris’s map were meant to be easily readable. Many landscape elements were given a realistic representation that was entirely clear to a contemporary map user. When executed well, maps and plans were drawn with ‘scrupulous exactitude’ according to Dupain de Montesson (Dupain, 1775). Unfortunately, modern cartographers do not hold this opinion and consider old maps to lack standardisation. For modern historical and geographical scholars, the Carte de Cabinet constitutes a primary source of information on the pre-industrial landscape; however, these researchers are not familiar with 18 th century cartographic semiotics. Thus, a (re)construction of the legend of the Carte de Cabinet might be very useful to these individuals. Therefore, in this report, we will attempt to reconstruct the legend and elaborate on the relationship between the iconography of the Ferraris map and cartographic manuals, as well as its relationship with Cassini’s Carte de France (1756-1789). In this way, we hope to somewhat clarify the dissemination of cartographic know-how in the eighteenth century and draw some preliminary conclusions about the level of accuracy of the Ferraris map. THE LEGEND : HISTORICAL FACTS In spite of its name, the initiative for the Ferraris map did not come from Ferraris. During his lifetime, Joseph- Jean-François de Ferraris was a protégé first of Léopold I, duc de Lorraine, and later of the Viennese court where he received his education. At an early age, he Joined the army in an infantry regiment. From 1764 onwards (or perhaps earlier), Ferraris was stationed in the Austrian Netherlands. In 1767, he became head of the artillery there. Until 1768, Ferraris was not known as a cartographer, although cartography was part of his education, as it was for all artillerists (Lemoine-Isabeau, 1983, p. 240). The decision to produce a map of the Austrian Netherlands was made by Empress Maria Theresia of Austria. During the Seven Years’ War, from 1756 till 1763, inaccurate maps were partly responsible for Austrian military losses. Therefore, Maria Theresia planned a total Landesaufnahme , a survey of her territories, and in 1759, she asked for the support of Charles de Lorraine, governor of the Austrian Netherlands and her brother-in-law. 1 It took until May 13 th of 1764 before the Austrian Hofkriegsrat was permitted to give the orders for the first Austrian survey on a scale of 1 : 28,800 (1 Wiener Zoll: 400 Wiener Klafter), starting in Böhmen and Mähren (Gachard, 1843, p. 4-5; Lemoine-Isabeau, 1983, p. 228). Since the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1748, which marked the end of the War of the Austrian Succession (1740- 1748), Charles de Lorraine was the governor of the Austrian Netherlands, and he represented the archduchess until 1780. Due to the loss of Silesia to Frederick the Great during the war, Maria Theresia renounced the political tolerance that the Habsburg rulers maintained toward their territories and began to develop a strong central government. Initially, the economic prosperity and military security that Charles de Lorraine attempted to bring to the Austrian Netherlands were not hampered by this new policy. However, all of this changed with the arrival of Count Charles de Cobenzl, who was promoted to Minister Plenipotentiary of the Austrian Netherlands in 1753. His centralistic convictions did not coincide with Charles de Lorraine’s political aspirations (Vann, 1992; Galand, 1993). It was therefore only shortly after Cobenzl’s death in January 1770 that Charles de Lorraine could recommend Ferraris’s proJect in Vienna. Maria Theresia agreed on the 11 th of August 1770 (Lemoine-Isabeau, 1983, p.